General Motors was hit with a new $10 billion class action lawsuit this week over its ignition switch recall, alleging that the company’s actions hurt the resale values for millions of vehicles.

The GM class action lawsuit was filed by Anna Andrews in federal court in California on June 18. Unlike previous ignition switch lawsuits pursuing an economic loss recovery, this claims damages associated with vehicles that were not among the 2.5 recalled this year, indicating that the automaker should be required to compensate 15 million car and truck owners for diminished resale value.

The large number of members of the class are based on the company-wide loss in stature suffered by GM over the past several months, as it has been revealed that the company knew about ignition switch problems in certain Chevrolet, Pontiac and Saturn vehicles for several years, but failed to take action.

The company has taken a public beating on the issue, is under investigation in several criminal probes, and was fined $35 million by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. In an effort to show it has turned over a new leaf, GM has increased internal scrutiny and has recalled more than 20 million vehicles for a variety of different issues since February.

An internal investigation by former U.S. attorney Anton Valukas revealed a “pattern of incompetence” in the world’s largest automaker over the past decade.

The class action complaint alleges that GM caused damages for owners of the 15 million vehicles, which could see losses in value of between $500 and $2,600, regardless of whether they were involved in the ignition switch recall or not.

Andrews argues that she would not have bought her used Buick LaCrosse if GM’s vehicle defect problems had been known at the time. The day before the lawsuit was filed, GM announced it was recalling some 2005-2009 Buick LaCrosse vehicles due to ignition problems as well. It is unclear whether Andrews’ vehicle is affected.

GM faces a growing number of ignition switch recall lawsuits, including personal injury and wrongful death claims by people who were injured or lost loved ones when air bags failed to deploy during accidents, as well as economic lawsuits filed by investors and vehicle owners, who say that GM’s actions led to a depreciation of the value of the cars and the company’s stocks.

The company’s leadership has sworn to compensate personal injury victims and families in wrongful death cases, but said the company will fight economic damages claims.

How do I join Anna Andrews lawsuit claiming GMs problem with recalls led to extreme drop in trade-in value of my 2013 Buick La Crosse.
I was just informed that my 2013 Fully loaded Buick Hybrid is worth $14000.00 , with 19,600 miles in excellent shape and I still owe $22,000.00.
The premature trade is prompted by a lack of power the vehicle offers. Vehicle it too large for its engine size! I thought this was my dream car and the last I was going to buy. I can’t afford the loss to trade in the vehicle.

I have owned 2 vehicles on recall lists. 1st Saturn Ion that the key became stuck in the ignition on the “on” position…the car would not turn off and key was immovable. After several months of arguing with dealership and gm to fix it (I had to unhook battery to shut car off) I traded it in for an HHR..it happened again!@! (this time it was within a few weeks of purchase so I threatened to call the local news. then an entire year later they announced the recalls….I had to wait 6 months for the new part and then they wanted to charge me…@#$^& I am out thousands of dollars and I could go on but I will stop I am still angry and would like to know how to sue them

Share Your Comments

First Name*

Last Name

Email*

Shared Comments*

I authorize the above comments be posted on this page*

Yes

No

Have Your Comments Reviewed by a Lawyer

Provide additional contact information if you want an attorney to review your comments and contact you about a potential case. This information will not be published.

Contact Phone #

Alt Phone #

Private Comments

NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.